Very deficient movie
-
TanteWaileka — 13 years ago(May 27, 2012 02:32 PM)
subjectivism hmmm This movie was exactly what and how it should be it did not need nor have over dramatizing and it pushed absolutely NO agenda.
It was far from being 'sugary sweet' (which is really quite redundant a phrase) nor was there any pandering.
So women over 45 appreciated this movie? I'm fine with that, being in my 60s. My first husband was killed in Vietnam, my uncle died during WWII and my daughter lost a limb in one of the more recent wars.
If you think you can live in the US of A , the greatest country in the WORLD, and have more opportunity to do and be and have what you want from life, and not ever have to risk your own life, then be thankful and grateful and respectful for others who have had more courage and love of country than you do. Because of their sacrifice, and their family's sacrifice too, you have more opportunity than anywhere else in the world.
That's what this movie is about.
You want drama? Go watch Bonnie and Clyde or White Heat or some 'rap' venue.
Life is a journey not a destination. Fear nothing. -
LTUM — 13 years ago(May 27, 2012 02:44 PM)
1 do i know you?
2 why did you pick me from the middle of the pack? shouldn't you be replying to the OP?
3 45 Y O women w t f???
4 if you want to compare, i can ASSURE you that my family served more than yours, returns and losses. guaranteed. and, moreover, nobody (me nor the OP) said ONCE anything bad about the USA, the military, or any of that. we were saying the movie sucked (not the subject it covered). so i ask you, why defend a bad movie? is it because you like the subject so much, that excuses everything for you? ridiculous.
and yes, subjective. and you are a perfect example. you can't see EVEN THE POINT IN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE for your own hard-held views on the subject. a spade is a spade, and this movie was boring
5 it did pander. to types like you. and the irony is you are too close to the pandering to see you were being pandered.
6 look. have no prob whatsoever with the content. it's the poor filmmaking that is the issue here.
7 more power to the USA, all military, having more opportunity, et al. nobody said otherwise.
8 i hate rap. HATE it to the core. so that suggestion is about a thousand percent off lmao
"Cos f__k's sake, who'd wanna keep trying to shoot a nice guy like me?"
XXXX -
raynkim96 — 15 years ago(April 20, 2010 08:49 AM)
This is not a "movie" per se. It is a filming of a log that the Colonel kept of his entire trip and what he encountered. He rarely got to know the people involved during his travel so how could there be character development? Imagine fiming a day in your life. How much development would your characters have?
-
GeorgiaBound — 15 years ago(April 21, 2010 01:56 PM)
You say that you thought this movie was going to be interesting. This was a movie based on real-life and not meant to be in any way a blockbuster. I felt it was an excellent movie and I have no ties to the military whatsoever. It was very touching and I thought they did an excellent job in showing the difficulty they have in doing what needs to be done for a fallen soldier whether they are from the marines, the army, the airforce or the navy! I am still proud to be born and raised here in America even though this country is going down the toilet with Obama at the helm! God bless this countrywe need it!
-
kslinks — 15 years ago(May 30, 2010 10:56 PM)
As a military spouse for 12 years (but under your age quotient) with a husband currently deployed, I can say that this was truly a good film experience. And it was very true to the experience of being in the military, an occupation that allows for the meeting of many people but not for the depth of relationship that one would hope for given more normal circumstances. As military members move frequently, there is a tendency to avoid becoming terribly close to folks that you will have to say goodbye to all to soon. And yet, military members are a family and the chance meeting of another member does confer a certain relationship that is immmediately felt, whether for moments or days.
As for the experiences with civilian strangers, the portrayal was very accuratethese kinds of interactions do happen to members in uniform, as I have seen personally. We have been honored with thanks, free meals, offers of help and merchandise, strangers picking up the tab for things when we are out somewhere and he is in uniform. The portrayal of the reactions by Col. Strobl were also accurate; when these things happen, we are never sure quite how to react other than a strained "thank you".
Also, although most military members have true conviction in their roles and feel very deeply about what they are doing, it is nonetheless not discussed openlyas if to discuss the sacrifice makes it harder to bear. So military members tend to brush off, evade, and avoid discussion of their basic beliefs, values, and feelings about their own sacrifices and the sacrifices of their brothers and sisters in uniform. So the lack of discussion about the issues of Col. Strobl is appropriate as well.
What you mistake for a lack of depth is simply a lack of familiarity with the actual circumstance of being involved in the military. From a military member standpoint, this was a true and honest portrayal. -
barbosa-vicki — 15 years ago(June 05, 2010 11:44 PM)
I generally like movies with plenty of action and conflict, and I understand what the OP is saying. But this movie has a subtle, thought-provoking subtext underlying the apparently simple actions and travel. Putting oneself into the mind of the officer, you can feel some of his reactions and feelings, and it becomes very powerful. Kevin Bacon is no mean actor, and does a good job portraying the appreciation of the respect accorded to both him and PFC Phelps, his conflicted feelings over his own role, and also his coming to appreciate the man he was escorting.
I never cry at movies, but found myself shedding tears at this one. There was action and conflict, but it was something you have to imagine for yourself, from the clues presented. And it was good in that it helps us appreciate even more the sacrifices of our servicemen and women no matter what we may think of the war, we are pretty well united in support for them. -
Sproketer — 15 years ago(June 08, 2010 10:11 PM)
It's about time a film was made like this that wasn't propaganda. It wasn't a pro-war or anti-war film. It wasn't a movie made to make a BIG STATEMENT. It was a film made to simply and respectfully show what Lt.Col. Mike Strobl saw and felt. It worked in a very simple and moving way. It didn't need character development other than Strobl's. It didn't need flashbacks showing Chance Phelps alive and what happened in Iraq.
It spoke volumes about many things, but didn't beat you over the head with it, but spoke it clearly and economically. As to the uni-dimensionality of the characters, the kid who drove Strobl said he didn't understand why our country was in Iraq, and told how guys he knew had died or were injured, and said he had to do something.
The soundtrack, since you mentioned it, was far from blatant, emotional, or manipulative. As a matter of fact, I barely recall its being there. -
jdubhua — 15 years ago(July 12, 2010 01:08 PM)
The OP's original review of this movie is a text book example of someone who has completely misunderstood the movie and simply did not get the point at all. This is what happens when someone tries way too hard to force himself to sound really intellectual and objective, and then just ends up betraying a glaring lack of understanding about the subject in question. The whole things was sounding overly pretentious and pompous from the beginning, but when I read his bit about how the soundtrack was emotionally manipulative and ubiquitous and slow paced I just simply could no longer take it seriously. The soundtrack was barely even there for 90% of the movie so the only thing it could justifiably be called is overly sparse, not manipulative.
-
imdb-20-fcasparx — 13 years ago(May 05, 2012 07:17 PM)
You barely recall the soundtrack being there? In my book that shows what a well done piece of propaganda that film is.
And yes, it was neither a pro-, nor an anti-war film. But it was certainly pro-USMC, pro-heroism in the face of tragedy.
I am not surprised that this film had all the support of the US-military. This in a time were documentary pictures of dead US-soldiers were completely supressed.
I am all for a democratic society that respects it's fallen fighters - and the living. And shows that respect. But not in a sheepish way, as was so common after 9/11.
Iraq 2003 was and is a total disaster. Hussein had no WMD any more. Locally, Iraq was a power to reckon with, balancing Iran. Now Iraq's beep leadership is bonding with Iran, and vice versa, shifting the local power balance very much towards Iran. Iraq 2003 was probably the worst move that the Bush government did. Except cashflow-wise for Dick Cheney and his friends, of course. -
TanteWaileka — 13 years ago(May 27, 2012 02:45 PM)
you don't know anything about what was or was not found in Iraq. I worked on the JACADS project and have family members very high up in the USA military.
Did it not occur to you that WMD's do not have to be nuclear weapons but can be chemical weapons? There were WMDs in Iraq, they are now in Northern Canada (storage) it's been a while, so I think it is 'okay' to say that. It's probably public knowledge by now.
How do you think this was 'pro' USMC? It was not pro or con anything, but life 'as it is'.
Do you think it is 'respectful' to show pictures of dead soldiers? as was done during the Vietnam war? I think you do not understand much.
Life is a journey not a destination. Fear nothing. -
RobBase086-1 — 15 years ago(July 14, 2010 10:37 AM)
Well this movie was based on a true story about a Marine who gave his life for his country and his buddies as well. I loved the movie and there were points during the film where I teared up because it was very sad to watch.
I learned how a fellow brother comes home and how well he/or she is taken care of by those who serve along side us. I would love to own a copy of this movie for my collection to watch anytime.
USA UP ALL NIGHT petition!
www.petitiononline.com/moviefan/petition.html -
peterz95 — 12 years ago(June 30, 2013 09:01 PM)
The movie takes place over a matter of days, hours even, obviously you've never buried anyone, not a lot of growth at the time. The story, if you'd stopped being deficient of a developed character yourself and looked into it, actually happen to the LTC/Bacon character. The story is about how those he encountered REACTED to the Marine in the casket. Those who agreed and supported your OP are just as lame mentally as you are.
-
Moon_and_New_York_City — 11 years ago(March 17, 2015 06:46 PM)
I wanted to love this movie, I thought for sure I would love this movie.
First off, its HBO Films for crying out loud and they rarely if ever put out a dud. Then there's all those EMMY nominations and the SAG Award for Kevin Bacon.
So I checked it out from the library and watched it tonight and all I can say is - what a major disappointment. I mean - where is the dramatic narrative? The character arc? The inciting incident? All those things we learn in screenwriting school required to make a good movie!
NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING, happens in this movie. The title says it all. Kevin Bacon takes Chance home to his family. The End.
I gave it a six stars out of respect for the Marines, but it was hollow and dry and emotionally stagnant.
I would never watch it again.
the best that you can do is fall in love